This commission will be composed of:

Academic Coordinator

Dean/Vice Dean to whom he/she delegates

3 representatives of the research line L1 “Innovation and research in education”.

2 representatives of the L2 research line “Teaching and learning in specific knowledge areas”.

Supervision and monitoring of the PhD student.-

Once the doctoral student has enrolled, the tutor and supervisor will establish their personalized activity document for the purposes of the individualized control record referred to in Article 2.5 of the Official Doctoral Studies Regulations of the University of La Laguna. All activities of interest to the doctoral student's development will be recorded in it, as regulated by the university, the Doctoral School, the body responsible for the doctoral program, or the academic committee itself. It will be regularly reviewed by the tutor and the thesis supervisor and evaluated by the academic committee responsible for the doctoral program, as referred to in Article 14 of the aforementioned Regulations.

Before the end of the first year, the doctoral candidate will prepare a Research Plan that will include, at a minimum, the methodology to be used and the objectives to be achieved, as well as the means and timeline for achieving them. This Plan may be improved and detailed throughout the doctoral program and must be endorsed by the tutor and supervisor.

The program's academic committee will annually evaluate the development of the doctoral student's research plan and activities document, along with the reports that the tutor and director must issue for this purpose.

A positive evaluation will be an essential requirement to continue in the program.

In the event of a negative evaluation, the academic committee will issue a report justifying it, proposing appropriate corrective measures for the next evaluation. In the case of a negative evaluation, the doctoral student must be re-evaluated within six months, for which purpose a new Research Plan will be drawn up. In the event of another negative evaluation, the doctoral student will be permanently withdrawn from the program.

Procedure used by the Academic Committee for the assignment of the tutor and thesis director of the doctoral student.

Tutors and thesis directors will be assigned taking into account at least the following criteria:

– Each doctoral student will be assigned the tutor proposed by the doctoral student, provided that the proposal has been approved by the researcher.

– Each researcher will be assigned a maximum of two doctoral candidates per year, with no more than four simultaneous positions.

– To the extent possible, the tutor and supervisor will be the same. However, they may differ when the thesis supervisor is a researcher who is not affiliated with the ULL, since the tutor must always be affiliated with the ULL.

– In the case of different tutors and directors, the tutor, with the prior consent of the director, may act as co-director.

Procedure for the control of the Activity Document of each PhD student and certification of their data.-

Following admission to the Doctoral Programme, the Academic Committee, with the Supervision Agreement signed by the doctoral candidate and the University (signatures of the tutor, the Coordinator of the Doctoral Programme in Education, the person in charge of the ULL and subsequently the thesis director), will open the Doctoral Candidate Activities Document (DAD), the format of which will conform to the model established in the Good Practices Guide, taking into account the specifications of this PD, and which will be in electronic format via a website.

All activities carried out by the doctoral student within the Doctoral Program in Education will be recorded in the DAD (Department of Education). The doctoral student, his or her tutor, thesis supervisor, the CA (Certification of Academic Affairs), the Doctoral School, and the Doctoral Committee will have access to it (through a code and password with different access levels) for consultation and incorporation of records.

In the DAD, apart from the identification data, there will be a first section in which the tutor/director will indicate the minimum number of activities, among those proposed by the Doctoral Program in Education, that the doctoral student must complete. The second section will then list the activities the doctoral student is currently completing.

For each of the activities:

a) The doctoral student will describe the purpose of the activity, its relationship with the Research Plan (RP) and its identification data (type, title, organizing institution, speakers or those responsible, place and date of completion, duration in hours).

b) The tutor/Director will authorize the carrying out of the activity and will incorporate his/her authorization signature.

c) And once the doctoral student has completed it and submitted the corresponding proof of completion to the tutor and/or Director, the latter will incorporate his/her signature of verification/certification.

The tutor and/or thesis director will incorporate the annual reports they prepare into this Document of Doctoral Student Activities and the Academic Committee will incorporate the annual evaluations.

The characteristics, requirements and documentation to be presented to pass the training activities can be consulted in the following link.

Procedure for the annual evaluation of the PhD student's Research Plan and Activity Document

Before the end of their first year in the PhD program, and in conjunction with the first annual report of their scholarship or predoctoral contract, doctoral candidates will prepare a Research Plan (RP), which will include the following information: introduction and justification of the topic of study; working hypothesis and main objectives; methodology to be used; available material resources; three-year timeframe; and main bibliographical references.

This PI, endorsed by the thesis supervisor and, if different, by the doctoral student's advisor, will be approved by the Academic Committee of the Doctoral Program (through the addition of their signatures to said document; in the case of the AC, the signature will be done by the Coordinator) and will be incorporated into the doctoral student's Activity Document. This incorporation will be completed within a maximum of 10 business days after its submission by the doctoral student.

In the second and third years, the content of the PhD student's Research Plan will vary, as it will reflect the following aspects:

– Review of objectives covered and skills acquired based on the initial plan presented (in the first year) for the research period corresponding to the completed research year. The objectives and tasks set for the research year will be analyzed in accordance with the Thesis Project. The tasks planned for this phase of the research include cross-curricular and specific training, that is, the activities carried out and reflected in the Activity Document.

– Summary of the most relevant results and achievement of the objectives set and, where applicable, difficulties encountered that have prevented their execution.

– Adjustments or changes in the objectives and tasks set for subsequent years of research.

– Satisfaction with the supervisor's supervision. Frequency of meetings with the supervisor to review progress. If not, explain the reasons.

– Reasoned forecast of the need to request an extension at the end of the third year of research.

The Academic Committee of the Doctoral Program in Education will be responsible for assessing the PhD candidate's Activity Document (DAD), Research Plan (RP), and the progress of their doctoral thesis each year in January. This assessment will be facilitated by the annual evaluation/monitoring reports prepared by the tutor and the thesis director (which will be consolidated into a single report if the tutor and director share the same structure). These reports will address aspects related to the quality of the doctoral candidate's training, the adequacy of the activities carried out with their research, and progress in completing their thesis. More specifically, the tutor and director will report on the following elements and conclude with a favorable or unfavorable assessment of the doctoral candidate's performance:

– Degree of compliance with the planned activities and, where applicable, the changes introduced in the planning.
– Degree of use/performance of the activities carried out for the doctoral student's research work.
– Type and frequency of monitoring the doctoral student’s progress, such as monthly meetings.
– Progress made towards the completion of the doctoral thesis and the acquisition of skills. It will be indicated whether any achievements have been made.
some difficulty.
– Overall performance assessment, with respect to the completion of tasks, results obtained (publications, conferences, etc.) and acquired skills.
– Starting in the second year of research, the estimated time required to complete the thesis is analyzed and, if applicable, whether an extension will be necessary at the end of the third year of research. If the Director deems the successful completion of the research unfeasible, the reasons will be stated.

These reports will also be incorporated, along with the Academic Committee's annual Evaluation Report, into the PhD student's Activity Document. A positive evaluation by the Academic Committee will be an essential requirement for continuing in the PhD program. In the case of a negative evaluation, which will be duly justified, the doctoral student must be re-evaluated within six months, for which purpose a new Research Plan will be drawn up. In the event of another negative evaluation, the doctoral student will be permanently withdrawn from the PhD program.

Furthermore, information regarding the forecast of stays at other centers, joint supervisions and international mentions can be found in section 5.3 on theses for the international doctoral mention, as well as in activity no. 4 called "mobility."

The Doctoral Committee, provided the appropriate academic and financial conditions exist, will promote and facilitate the participation of international experts in the monitoring committees, in the issuance of reports prior to the presentation of doctoral theses, and in the thesis-reading panels.